Twilight II Posted November 27, 2011 Posted November 27, 2011 This was a very important point. Surely we should accept her own testimony on this: Quote: Had she been ordained in the interim? Some have argued that she had. But the question is settled definitely by her own hand. In 1909 she filled out a Biographical Information Blank for the General Conference records. On the blank for item 19, which asks,If ordained, state when, where, and by whom, she simply inscribed an X. This is the same response she made to item 26, which asked, If remarried, give date, and to whom. In this way she indicated that she had never remarried, nor had she ever been ordained. She was not denying that God had chosen and equipped her, but she indicated that there had never been an ordination ceremony carried out for her. 29 Good enough for me. I would like to see Tom's response to this simple evidence?
Administrators Tom Wetmore Posted November 28, 2011 Administrators Posted November 28, 2011 Seems ambiguous to me. "Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good." "Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal." "I love God only as much as the person I love the least." *Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth. (And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.)
Woody Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 . May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
Woody Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 . May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
Woody Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 . May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
Moderators Bravus Posted November 28, 2011 Moderators Posted November 28, 2011 Well... Truth is important
Woody Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Well... Well what? May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
ClubV12 Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Well,,,, it's ambiguous, you can't make a perfect case either way based on those documents. But you could say a lot of what the bible has to say is also ambiguous. You could say that about a lot of what Sister White has to say. Thats why you've got to look at the "book", not pick a verse or two or a quote here and there to hang everything on. Sometimes that works OK, other times you need to consider the context, the history, the overall big picture, the weight of evidence, all things must be considered. For me, the weight of evidence leans heavily toward "not ordained" by man for Sister White, but certainly ordained of God!
M. T. Cross Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 That kinda makes me think that my marriag certificate is ambiguous. Wonder how my wife will feel about that.
Woody Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Quote: For me, the weight of evidence leans heavily toward "not ordained" by man for Sister White, but certainly ordained of God! If that is your belief - I have a question for you. If God thought it wise to ordain her - who are we to think she shouldn't be? I will give you that it is unclear as to whether GOD ordained her as a minister - or if man ordained her as a minister. But clearly she felt and signed off as being an ordained minister many times with both the General Conference and with the individual conferences. In fact the Michigan conference was the first to recognize this. But the Michigan conference has long ago strayed from it's roots I am sad to say. So, I ask you - which is more important - to be ordained to the pastoral ministry by God Himself - or by man? May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
ClubV12 Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Wel,,,, how many have you got and are the certain sections crossed out of some and left intact on others? If so, I'm with your wife on this one, I would be deeply concerned. Woody says, "But clearly she felt and signed off as being an ordained minister many times." I see no weight of evidence that supports she did what you suggest at all. In fact, that is a prime question this thread is attempting to answer. DID she "clearly" "sign off" as being ordained to ANYBODY at ANYTIME? The weight of evidence says she did not, at best it's "ambiguous". The question is asked, What right has MAN to make this judgment? The God given responsibility is the right certain men have been given. We don't grant ordination to everyone that graduates from Andrews with a theology degree after all. Somebody, at some point, has to make that call for you. IF you are called of God, ordained by Him, it will be apparent and "man" won't have a problem with that. God does not expect us to be "mind readers", we need to PROVE that which is true and hold fast to it. Not accept just everyone that comes along and claims to be ordained of God.
M. T. Cross Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 There are about as many things crossed out on my marriage certificate as there are on those ones Woody posted.
Woody Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 As far as I know - there is only one of a total of eight that I've seen personally that has the appearance of something being crossed out. Of course we have no idea who crossed anything out and why. May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
Administrators Tom Wetmore Posted November 28, 2011 Administrators Posted November 28, 2011 Just stop for a minute and think about it. This was not an isolated incident, a one-time event or anything done without her knowledge. She was issued ordained minister credentials for 30 years! They were renewed after each GC Session. Those documents were not simply filed in the records at the GC. She was handed the certificates. She held them in her own hands. She read them. For 30 years! She was a prophet of God. She had a pretty clear line of communication with Him. None of this happened without His notice. Do you think that for 30 years of this practice of issuing EGW ordained minister credentials that if God had a problem with her being recognized and certified by the leaders of the Church as an ordained minister that he might have at least cleared his throat and and whispered "no" to His messenger to change that practice? I find that those 30 years of silence by God as pretty persuasive tacit approval of a woman being recognized as an ordained minister. "Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good." "Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal." "I love God only as much as the person I love the least." *Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth. (And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.)
ClubV12 Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Reality check, Ellen White is a red herring on the issue of ordination of women AND ordination by man or God. She was a prophet, her personal status is unequaled by anyone else in the Adventist church living or dead. ,,,but OK, lets beat this dead horse issue some more. We have THREE certificates, that's it, thats all we got. The suggestion that surely there must be more has no basis in fact, where are they? The weight of evidence is NOT clear on this issue and never will be. WHO were the men that actually, physically laid hands on the PROPHET to ordain her? It is inconceivable that would not be recorded somewhere by somebody. A passing comment, a footnote in a book or pamphlet, at the very least "hear say". We got NOTHING, not even a whisper. And yet, we know what she had for breakfast, what she planted in her garden, descriptions of the horses she owned. We even know what some of her traveling companions ate for dinner (bear meat in one case)!!!! Her life, find toothed comb, no stone unturned, NO WAY somebody wouldn't comment on her physcial ordination! Red herrring,,,, What does Sister White have to do with whether we should ordain the next graduatng class of Andrews University if they step forward and declare they have been called of God to the Ministry? If they are truly called of God, why do they need anybody to ordain them anyway? Just go right to work then, no worries. Or, is there actually some purpose to being physically ordained? Of course there is...
Woody Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Quote: The suggestion that surely there must be more has no basis in fact, where are they? Apparently you've not read all of this thread and it's photos. Look up above a few posts and count. I've seen eight. I don't have all eight at my finger tips. But there are more than three as I have demonstrated. May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
ClubV12 Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 It's a RED HERRING I tell you!!!! ...but whatever, let us continue to major in a minor. The documents posted are hard to read. I make out three, possibly four different years represented, not eight. Not that it would make any difference if there was 50! Sister White is irrelevant due to her unique status to the ordination of women today. What we do see in the documents is this: Apparently, at a glance, without thinking about it, she was ordained at some point, then she was not ordained, then she was again!!! And you call that "clear"? It's the very definition of "ambiguous"! In 1860 the GC wanted Ministerial credentials issued annually, by the way. But it would be decades before Ellen White was even considered as needing any. Tom says they were renewed every five years. I've heard others say every two years. James White said every year, whatever. Now here is something that MAY be relevant to the issue of this topic: Several other women were also "licensed Ministers" of that time, along with Sister White. I wonder what forms were used for those women and if there are any copies available?
Moderators Bravus Posted November 28, 2011 Moderators Posted November 28, 2011 I've made comments before about people who can continue to hold their opinions no matter what the evidence says, and been howled down. Now I have (more) evidence... Truth is important
Twilight II Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Seems ambiguous to me. Ambiquous? A form she personally filled in? Dictating that she was not an ordained minister? "Though one rose from the dead..."
Twilight II Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 I've made comments before about people who can continue to hold their opinions no matter what the evidence says, and been howled down. Now I have (more) evidence... Indeed, yet your own opinions, do they hold the same weight in your balance?
Moderators Bravus Posted November 28, 2011 Moderators Posted November 28, 2011 Exactly the same weight. That is, I modify my opinions when new evidence becomes available. Might want to give it a try some time. Truth is important
Twilight II Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Exactly the same weight. That is, I modify my opinions when new evidence becomes available. Might want to give it a try some time. I do not do that Bravus. I filter my thoughts and ideas by Gods Word. And test all "evidence" by that. That being the only reliable source of information upon which to build a worldview on, in the whole world. I do not trust my "own" reasoning, unless it is fully supported by the Word of God. Because "reasonings" often arise from vanity and pride, either our own or others. When the whole human race is in a broken condition, who can trust their pride filled "opinions"?
ClubV12 Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 When I first started looking into this thread I had assumed Ellen White was in fact an ordained Minister of the Adventist church. It really made no difference one way or the other, to me, as it concerns the ordination subject today. But, the more I looked for the proof, the more I realized she was NOT officially ordained. Turns out that's just another internet rumor. THIS thread is filled with rumors. In many respects this entire forum is no different than in any other forum on the internet. People express their opinion's as if they are absolute fact. If you question the "fact" they just stated, like Bravus said, it can get ugly,,,, and thats a fact. Seldom have I seen a thread with as many "rumors" stated as "fact" as I have on THIS thread. Over an issue that doesn't amount to hill of beans, whether Sister White was or wasn't officially ordained with the laying on of hands by the brethren. We simply have no proof that happened. The evidence we do have is called into question on two fronts: 1. Spurious claims, said to be fact, but are really nothing more than opinion. 2. Lack of definitive evidence across the board. In my opinion (which on the internet is of course "fact") the preponderance of the evidence for official ordination is not there. Case dismissed. Not a bit of evidence has been presented for a SINGLE additional ordained women Minister at all, we have only "rumor".
Woody Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Quote: Over an issue that doesn't amount to hill of beans, whether Sister White was or wasn't officially ordained with the laying on of hands by the brethren. We simply have no proof that happened. I've provided proof that either she was ordained or she was a liar for some 30 years. May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
ClubV12 Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Uh, NO you haven't provided any "proof" and nobody else has either!!! Boy, I'd hate to have you on MY jury if thats what you consider proof. Not to mention how you count. EIGHT documents? Count them again, sloowwllly. Three, possibly four, can't make out the date. Multiple postings of the same document don't count twice, or three times. But again, if there were 50, you still got a problem. At least one of them has "ordained" crossed out. What does THAT mean? That they gave it, took it away, gave it again? That is NOT proof of anything by any reasonable standards. What we got here is "rumor has it"....
Recommended Posts